Club or Entertainment?

[rodgerfox]

With the 'other' thread being locked (not sure why to be honest), I thought it would be worthwhile discussing a point that was raised.

The point was along the lines of 'the club is no longer a club, it's a company in an entertainment business'.

Throughout the 900 posts I made in the other thread, that line probably best describes the point I was making.

Now to some, that's fine. They want to be entertained. Happy to fork out $500 a year to be entertained.

To others, footy isn't about entertainment. It's about passion. It's about supporting a club, it's about family history, tradition and birthright!


I think to some, the thought of the 'club' that you were brought up on, that has been a part of your family makeup for 100 years, to be taken from under your nose and transformed into a money making 'brand' for wealthy businessmen - is sad.

What are your thoughts? Can you get excited about the Saints even though they aren't the same Saints that you grew up with? Are you happy to be sucked in by the AFL and emotionally blackmailed into being 'loyal' to your 'club' by buying a membership every year - all the while knowing that it isn't a club at all, but instead a business that just wants your cash?


Would you be far happier to see your 'club' play in the red, white and black strip each week at a local ground with 600 people standing in the outer with a pie and can in each hand?

Or is sacrificing the jumper, the history, the loyalty and the 'club' worthwhile to see the Saints compete on the big stage in the biggest comp each week?

[GrumpyOne]

Would you be far happier to see your 'club' play in the red, white and black strip each week at a local ground with 600 people standing in the outer with a pie and can in each hand?

Ask a die-hard Fitzroy supporter that question. They still play in the nether regions of a local competition in the same colours and using the same name.

Did they ignore Brisbane's premierships or did they celebrate them?

[Pilgram]

we still have the same colours and they are the best colours in the competition.
i find football thoroughly entertaining when we win.
i see membership as value for money when you are part of a winning organisation.
i dont understand people's frustration.
having said that however, success is a double-edged sword.

[Batnoe]

Without money we have no club... if we had a team that made no money (kangaroos) we would have no club in a couple of years....

Is there any business out there that doesnt need money to run?!!


I will always be a member and will always support the club.. as all saints should even if you think it is just a money making venture

[fonz_#15]

i pay money to the club each year because i love the club, and i love the sport.

with the brand of football we play, it is hard at times because it can be as boring as s***.

[remboy]

The games changes and we have to move with the times. I liked nothing more than to stand in the forward pocket at Moorabbin but those days are gone. Now I sit in comfort at the Dome and listen to the rain outside. If we need 30000+ members and average attendances above that to survive that was never going to happen at Moorabbin.
Football clubs now need at least $30 million a year to survive. The game has gone beyond being a suburban game and is big business whether we like it or not.
There's no way I would prefer the Saints to be playing in front of 600 at a local ground compared to 30-40k at the Dome.
I remember when Don Hanly came to the club he said had wanted to separate the emotion from the process of running the club and run it as a business. After a few months in the job he said he realised that you couldn't separate the emotion and passion from the rest of the club because it formed a part of the club and without it you didn't have a club.
That's my two cents worth.

[Mr Magic]

Why does it need to be one or the other.
I believe it needs to be both to survive.

A Club with no entertainment value will not attract enough outside dollars to keep afloat in today's environment.

[cowboy18]

My investment is emotional - >99%, the 4 memberships (1 SC and 3 juniors) and the game or two I see live are wonderful but my memberships are there to help us be part of the club.

The entertainment comes from being engaged with the club, team, players at the time and that (occasionally!) 24/7 passion we get when the clubs in crisis/triumph/on the verge.

The 3hrs of game time don't entertain me that much on a regular basis. If anything it stresses me (esp. live TV games).

So for me it's more than sporting entertainment, its about the belonging. Having moved away from Melbourne in the pre-internet mid 90s there was no other option than to be a little less engaged (scouring Sydney for Melbourne papers with footy news in the mid 90s was no mean feat) but despite that I still enjoyed the odd game on TV.

I'll never forget that feeling in 1997 when I got home from the SSO and found out we had beaten North. Grabbed the phone, booked a flight, hung up, then looked at my wife and asked "Oh - did you want to come too?"

That was entertaining...

[TriColourDisciple]

While there's a club in the AFL called St.kilda and are wearing Red, White & Black, I'll follow them no matter what.
Sometimes I think it would be easier if the club didn't exist, because, like you, I don't like the corporatisation ( Is that a word?) of the league & wouldn't be interested in the AFL at all.
As it is now, I very rarely watch games that don't involve The Saints.
Having said that, my passion for The Saints remains as strong as ever.

...I guess it's in the blood.

[WayneJudson42]

Rodge, it's probably become the latter, as the AFL seek to convert the game into entertainment because they believe that it's necessary to survive.

Because of this, survival has become a ruthless business. The by-product is that in order to survive, you need on-field success. This cures everything... including sponsorship and membership.

So, things like locked training sessions don't bother me if it leads to success.

As far as belonging goes... times have changed. Like it or not.

The old tribalism died as the suburban demographics changed. I'd say that 90% of inner city areas are no longer working class as they once were.

I feel the frustration of supporters in this matter. It's not about defending the club or otherwise. My take is that the club has embarked on a course it believes to be the correct one to ensure off field and on field success. Is it? Only time will tell.

Until such time - for better or worse - I'll give them the opportunity to do so. If that makes me a sheep, then so be it.

As far being involved... not sure what the answer is for that. The fact remains that things have changed, and AFL is more entertainment, and the whole "club" thing is but a mere by-product to give people a sense of belonging, so that they will stay with it.

I guess if I examine it closely enough, my motivation is to watch the club win and win a flag. To be honest, I'd like to be - for once - one of those supporters who goes nuts after winning a flag. It becomes like a child after while. You have expectations... they frustrate the clappers out of you... but eventually, you love 'em and wan to see them succeed.

Like a few have mentioned. Perhaps the grievances should be directed at the club through proper channels.

[St DAC]

It's different things to different people. To some degree it will depend on your vintage, family culture, location, wealth level. Some folks will have grown up supporting the club through thick and thin (mainly thin ) others will be more recent supporters used to the AFL not old VFL culture.

To me it's more a life long club affiliation than general entertainment. But I'm of that vintage.

[markp]

With the 'other' thread being locked (not sure why to be honest)

It's an interesting equation though... a Club that is all about its people can be 'unsuccessful' and still engender loyalty and passion, whereas a corporation that plays an ugly brand of footy, keeps its customers in the dark on most issues, protects their 'brand' above all else, and does not ultimately deliver the big prize (all while increasingly extracting cash) may find it more difficult.

I appreciate it's a fine line that needs to be walked these days (and I don't think things are irreparably dire), but I don't think they can have it both ways.

[WayneJudson42]

An interesting note... look at Port as an example. Recent Premier. Old club, and very successful. Promotes itself as a proud club and embraces supporters. Yet they can't fill AAMI stadium, even during finals.

[markp]

An interesting note... look at Port as an example. Recent Premier. Old club, and very successful. Promotes itself as a proud club and embraces supporters. Yet they can't fill AAMI stadium, even during finals.

The 'Power', who change their ugly jumper every 5 minutes for something even uglier and whose fans feel over-charged for finals tickets?

[WayneJudson42]

An interesting note... look at Port as an example. Recent Premier. Old club, and very successful. Promotes itself as a proud club and embraces supporters. Yet they can't fill AAMI stadium, even during finals.

The 'Power', who change their ugly jumper every 5 minutes for something even uglier and whose fans feel over-charged for finals tickets?

Yep. The jumper should be irrelevant IMO. Do you believe that if they went to their traditional jumper, they'd get more fans?

What are their member #'s?

Do you also like taking a contrarian position to all my comments?

What about NTH? 2 flags. Arguably the best team on the 90's... Same jumper.. although they did change to the Kangaroos for a bit. But same jumper... invoked the old "shinboner" spirit at every opp. Numbers sucked big time.

[markp]

An interesting note... look at Port as an example. Recent Premier. Old club, and very successful. Promotes itself as a proud club and embraces supporters. Yet they can't fill AAMI stadium, even during finals.

The 'Power', who change their ugly jumper every 5 minutes for something even uglier and whose fans feel over-charged for finals tickets?

Yep. The jumper should be irrelevant IMO. Do you believe that if they went to their traditional jumper, they'd get more fans?

What are their member #'s?

Do you also like taking a contrarian position to all my comments?

What about NTH? 2 flags. Arguably the best team on the 90's... Same jumper.. although they did change to the Kangaroos for a bit. But same jumper... invoked the old "shinboner" spirit at every opp. Numbers sucked big time.

A team's name and colours are vital, and prices charged are very important.... I don't see the value in the comparison though, Port have an entirely different set of circumstances to deal with than us.

I admire North Melbourne's resolve to stay North Melbourne, it is a shame they have so few fans... but we are not North Melbourne, and we are not Port 'Power'. We are St Kilda.

[WayneJudson42]

An interesting note... look at Port as an example. Recent Premier. Old club, and very successful. Promotes itself as a proud club and embraces supporters. Yet they can't fill AAMI stadium, even during finals.

The 'Power', who change their ugly jumper every 5 minutes for something even uglier and whose fans feel over-charged for finals tickets?

Yep. The jumper should be irrelevant IMO. Do you believe that if they went to their traditional jumper, they'd get more fans?

What are their member #'s?

Do you also like taking a contrarian position to all my comments?

What about NTH? 2 flags. Arguably the best team on the 90's... Same jumper.. although they did change to the Kangaroos for a bit. But same jumper... invoked the old "shinboner" spirit at every opp. Numbers sucked big time.

A team's name and colours are vital, and prices charged are very important.... I don't see the value in the comparison though, Port have an entirely different set of circumstances to deal with than us.

I admire North Melbourne's resolve to stay North Melbourne, it is a shame they have so few fans... but we are not North Melbourne, and we are not Port 'Power'. We are St Kilda.

True. The reason I raise this is because... well NFI really.

The argument is put about embracing members and the flow on results that provides. Yet we have clubs that do this, but still struggle.

Mind you, that said. Our club should have 40k members as a minimum given the sentimental support it has.

[rodgerfox]

It's an interesting equation though... a Club that is all about its people can be 'unsuccessful' and still engender loyalty and passion, whereas a corporation that plays an ugly brand of footy, keeps its customers in the dark on most issues, protects their 'brand' above all else, and does not ultimately deliver the big prize (all while increasingly extracting cash) may find it more difficult.

I appreciate it's a fine line that needs to be walked these days (and I don't think things are irreparably dire), but I don't think they can have it both ways.

A very good point.

Why would investors continue to put money into a business that they have no emotional tie to if it's products are shiit, and their performance is average?

They wouldn't.


This is why when times get tough for footy clubs, they play the emotion card. The 'shinboner spirit' line gets rolled out. It's because as a business, they have nothing to offer. They can't offer entertainment. So they have to fall back on the emotion and passion of the diehards.

The question is once the diehards lose interest, or just die - will clubs be able to rely on the newcomers to AFL to cough up the cash when they aren't getting entertained and don't have the passion to be emotionally blackmailed?

They'll just go and follow another sport or club that offers them better entertainment.

[saintly]

The games changes and we have to move with the times. I liked nothing more than to stand in the forward pocket at Moorabbin but those days are gone. Now I sit in comfort at the Dome and listen to the rain outside. If we need 30000+ members and average attendances above that to survive that was never going to happen at Moorabbin.
Football clubs now need at least $30 million a year to survive. The game has gone beyond being a suburban game and is big business whether we like it or not.
There's no way I would prefer the Saints to be playing in front of 600 at a local ground compared to 30-40k at the Dome.
I remember when Don Hanly came to the club he said had wanted to separate the emotion from the process of running the club and run it as a business. After a few months in the job he said he realised that you couldn't separate the emotion and passion from the rest of the club because it formed a part of the club and without it you didn't have a club.
That's my two cents worth.

i'm different. i love being able to sit on the wing at telstra, under cover, with no wind or rain.

i would hate to be standing at moorabin wathcing the game. I love the idea of 30,000 people cheerring on for their team.

its a business now. all teams treat it as such.

[rodgerfox]

i'm different. i love being able to sit on the wing at telstra, under cover, with no wind or rain.

i would hate to be standing at moorabin wathcing the game. I love the idea of 30,000 people cheerring on for their team.

its a business now. all teams treat it as such.

As 'entertainment', I don't rate the AFL at all. I haven't watched a non-Saints game in a long time.

[WayneJudson42]

It's an interesting equation though... a Club that is all about its people can be 'unsuccessful' and still engender loyalty and passion, whereas a corporation that plays an ugly brand of footy, keeps its customers in the dark on most issues, protects their 'brand' above all else, and does not ultimately deliver the big prize (all while increasingly extracting cash) may find it more difficult.

I appreciate it's a fine line that needs to be walked these days (and I don't think things are irreparably dire), but I don't think they can have it both ways.

A very good point.

Why would investors continue to put money into a business that they have no emotional tie to if it's products are shiit, and their performance is average?

They wouldn't.


This is why when times get tough for footy clubs, they play the emotion card. The 'shinboner spirit' line gets rolled out. It's because as a business, they have nothing to offer. They can't offer entertainment. So they have to fall back on the emotion and passion of the diehards.

The question is once the diehards lose interest, or just die - will clubs be able to rely on the newcomers to AFL to cough up the cash when they aren't getting entertained and don't have the passion to be emotionally blackmailed?

They'll just go and follow another sport or club that offers them better entertainment.

Yes and no.

Firstly, it will depend on their love of a sport. If they enjoy the spectacle, they'll watch and attend.

Secondly, humans by nature are a tribal beast, and will alwyas seek some form of social inclusion.

I suspect that as long as the game remains popular, there will always be a new generation of supporters for clubs. A different species to we oldies are... but supporters none the less.

We grew up in a different era, yet those who grow up this era won't know any different and accept things as being "normal". It's all relative.

One point I will add... is your use of the term "emotional blackmail".

With respect, almost every aspect of human interraction centers on a sales process andemotional blackmail.

Happens every day at home, at work, and everywhere else. That why so much marketing banks on this "emotional" blackmail.

[Richter]

As 'entertainment', I don't rate the AFL at all. I haven't watched a non-Saints game in a long time.

That's you Rodge. Attendance numbers at games have been increasing for years. TV rights have become bigger and bigger - suggesting that there is more and more of an audience to watch the game. I love watching AFL and a couple of years ago upgraded to AFL membership so that I could more easily go to other clubs games too.

It is far more likely that it is something fundamental within you that has changed rather than the game. The psychological concept is called "Actor-observer bias".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor-observer_bias

[saintsRrising]

Following up my point from the other thread used by the OP....

My view is that today that I really follow the St Kilda Football TEAM....

My team is a team that I am still very passionate about....but I have no illusions that it is truly a club any longer.

It is in name, but in reality we are only members of it in the same way that one is a member of saya local gym. It is a business relationship in terms of the "membership".

However above and beyond that I havea passionate and personal relationship with my "team".

My membership of the "club" is an entertainment package that allows me to watch my "team" play...but really plays no great role in my bond with my team.

I view it as that, rather than as being a true "club" membership.

[rodgerfox]

My membership of the "club" is an entertainment package that allows me to watch my "team" play...but really plays no great role in my bond with my team.

I view it as that, rather than as being a true "club" membership.

Question - would you buy a membership if you couldn't attend games?

[Banger2Plugger]

Ok, if only to entertain myself a little.
Why has the "club" become business?
1. Players have been driving up costs and TPP. From as late as the early 1980's players have gone from part time footballers to full time professional footballers, and hence have put their case forward to be adequately compensated for that change, and that demand of them by the clubs.

2. Stadium rationalisation - the cost of playing at a state of the art stadium versus a suburban footy oval. It is obvious that the cost of playing games at the Telstra Dome are far in exess of what games would have costed at Moorabbin.

3. Huge rise in AFL distributions from television rights

4. The demands by the supporters to win premierships! Hence increases in football department costs, rises in full time coaches and support staff costs. These people are full time professionals - some of them leaders in their field - as oppose to the early days of having a local gp as your club doctor.

5. The race to get members, and marketing a brand (another competition all together of clubs versus clubs) - marketing, administration expenses.

AFL is not club football - the VFL perhaps on the fence of club v business, District footy and below is where club footy is now played.

The growth of the game, the turning to professionalism over the past decade, and the underlying desire that every supporter wants that premiership for their club - is what has driven our club to being a business.

BUT why should that impact our passion for our club. Manchester United perhaps one of the biggest business operated clubs - their supporters are still passionate - they pay heaps more than we do for memberships - the players less accessible to the public, and their jumpers etc cost a fortune to buy. Yet their supporters are totally one eyed and passionate as anyone.

I don't believe the growth to a business, has any impact on the passion of a supporter.